Advertisement

Journal of comparative physiology

, Volume 148, Issue 4, pp 547–554 | Cite as

Auditory evoked potentials in the West Indian manatee (Sirenia:Trichechus manatus)

  • Theodore H. Bullock
  • Thomas J. O'Shea
  • Michael C. McClune
Article

Summary

Potentials evoked by clicks and tone pips were recorded by fine wires inserted extracranially in four West Indian manatees (Trichechus manatus) in air. Sounds were delivered via padded ear phones.

Averaging a few thousand trials at 20/s reveals early peaks at N5.4 (‘vertex’ negativity to a frontal reference, at 5.4 ms), P7.6, N8.8, P9.5 — probably equivalent to waves IV and VII of the typical mammalian auditory brainstem response (ABR). Averaging 100 trials at <4/s suffices to reveal a complex sequence of later peaks including N25, P80, N150 and P190; consistent smaller peaks are visible when several hundred trials are averaged.

Using tone pips with a rise and fall time of 2–5 ms the carrier frequency becomes important. Evoked potential wave forms are not the same at different frequencies, bringing out the fact that frequency is not a scalar that can be compensated for by intensity. Therefore the method was not used to obtain audiograms; however the largest EPs occur in the range of 1–1.5 kHz. EPs are found up to 35 kHz; almost no evoked potential is discernible at 40 kHz but the undistorted intensity available was limited. This is in reasonable agreement with the theoretical expectation for the upper limit of behavioral hearing from Heffner and Masterton based on head size and aquatic medium.

Among several ear phone placements, that over the external auditory meatus was the most effective, but only slightly so. The external canal is presumably fluid or tissue filled and sound enters over a large area.

Comparing data for two species on the most effective range of frequencies and the power spectra of their vocalizations,T. manatus is lower thanT. inunguis in both respects.

The results show the utility and limitations of the method of recording extracranial evoked potentials to sounds, especially for large and valuable animals under makeshift conditions.

Keywords

Carrier Frequency Auditory Brainstem Response Head Size Complex Sequence Effective Range 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Abbreviations

ABR

auditory brainstem response

AEP

averaged evoked potentials

EMG

electromyogram

F

frontal sinuses

V

vertex

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Beck CA, Bonde RK, Rathbun GB (1982) Analyses of propeller wounds on manatees in Florida. J Wildl Manege 46 (in press)Google Scholar
  2. Bullock TH (1981) Neuroethology deserves more study of evoked responses. Neuroscience 6:1202–1215Google Scholar
  3. Bullock TH, Grinnell AD, Ikezono E, Kameda K, Katsuki Y, Nomoto M, Sato O, Suga N, Yanagisawa K (1968) Electrophysiological studies of central auditory mechanisms in cetaceans. Z Vergl Physiol 59:117–156Google Scholar
  4. Bullock TH, Domning DP, Best R (1980) Evoked brain potentials demonstrate hearing in a manatee (Sirenia:Trichechus inunguis). J Mammal 61:130–133Google Scholar
  5. Corwin JT, Bullock TH, Schweitzer J (1982) Auditory brainstem responses in five vertebrate classes. EEG Clin Neurophys (in press)Google Scholar
  6. DeJong WW, Zweers A, Goodman M (1981) Relationship of aardvark to elephants; hyraxes and sea cows from α-crystallin sequences. Nature 292:538–540Google Scholar
  7. Eisenberg JF (1981) The mammalian radiations. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  8. Evans WE, Herald ES (1970) Underwater calls of a captive Amazon manatee,Trichechus inunguis. J Mammal 51:820–823Google Scholar
  9. Galambos R, Makeig S, Talmachoff PJ (1981) A 40-Hz auditory potential recorded from the human scalp. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 78:2643–2647Google Scholar
  10. Hartline PH (1971a) Physiological basis for detection of sound and vibration in snakes. J Exp Biol 54:349–371Google Scholar
  11. Hartline PH (1971b) Midbrain responses of the auditory and somatic vibration systems in snakes. J Exp Biol 54:373–390Google Scholar
  12. Hartman DS (1979) Ecology and behavior of the manatee (Trichechus manatus) in Florida. Am Soc Mammal Spec Publ 5:1–153Google Scholar
  13. Heffner H, Heffner R (1981) Functional interaural distance and high-frequency hearing in the elephant. J Acoust Soc Am (in press)Google Scholar
  14. Heffner H, Masterton B (1980) Hearing in Glires: domestic rabbit, cotton rat, feral house mouse, and kangaroo rat. J Acoust Soc Am 68:1584–1599Google Scholar
  15. Heffner R, Heffner H (1980) Hearing in the elephant (Elephas maximus). Science 208:518–520Google Scholar
  16. Husar SL (1977a) The West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus). US Fish Wildl Res Rep 7:1–22Google Scholar
  17. Husar SL (1977b)Trichechus inunguis. Mamm Species 72:1–4Google Scholar
  18. Husar SL (1978)Trichechus senegalensis. Mamm Species 89:1–3Google Scholar
  19. Marsh H (1981) The dugong. Proceedings of a seminar/workshop held at James Cook University of North Queensland, Australia, May 8–13, 1979. James Cook University, North Queensland, p 1–400Google Scholar
  20. Marsh H, Spain AV, Heinsohn GE (1978) Physiology of the dugong. Comp Biochem Physiol 61 [A]:159–168Google Scholar
  21. Masterton B, Heffner H, Ravizza R (1969) The evolution of human hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 45:966–985Google Scholar
  22. Popper AN (1980) Sound emission and detection by delphinids. In: Herman LM (ed) Cetacean behavior: mechanisms and functions. Wiley, New York, pp 1–52Google Scholar
  23. Ridgway SH, Bullock TH, Carder DA, Seeley RL, Woods D, Galambos R (1981) Dolphin auditory brainstem response: effect of click intensity, frequency and repetition rate. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 78:1943–1947Google Scholar
  24. Schevill WE, Watkins WA (1965) Underwater calls ofTrichechus (manatee). Nature 205:373–374Google Scholar
  25. Simpson GG (1932) Fossil Sirenia of Florida and the evolution of the Sirenia. Bull Am Mus Nat Hist 59:419–503Google Scholar
  26. Sonoda S, Takemura A (1975) Underwater sounds of the manatees,Trichechus manatus manatus andT. inunguis (Trichechidae). Rep Inst Breeding Res, Tokyo Univ.Agric 4:19–24Google Scholar
  27. Urick RJ (1975) Principles of underwater sound. Mc-Graw-Hill, New York, pp 1–384Google Scholar
  28. Wenz GM (1962) Acoustic ambient noise in the ocean: spectra and sources. J Acoust Soc Am 34:1936–1956Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • Theodore H. Bullock
    • 1
  • Thomas J. O'Shea
    • 2
  • Michael C. McClune
    • 1
  1. 1.Neurobiology Unit, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Department of Neurosciences, School of MedicineUniversity of CaliforniaSan Diego, La JollaUSA
  2. 2.US Fish and Wildlife ServiceDenver Wildlife Research CenterGainesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations